Muhammed Sidique vs Subi

Soumen Sen, C.J.

We have heard Mr. Mithun P., learned counsel for the petitioner.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, despite the pendency of an application for stay of operation of the impugned judgment before the Rent Control Appellate Authority, the execution court had posted the matter on 28^th July, 2026, and on a prayer made on that day, the matter has now been posted to 31^st July, 2026 for report after effecting delivery.

It appears that an application for stay of the eviction order was filed on 4^th April, 2026 and after our order was passed on 10^th April, 2026, the rent control appeal was transferred to the Court of the Additional District Judge/Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Irinjalakkuda on 3^rd July, 2026 and the said petition is pending.

We permit the petitioner to approach the Rent Control Appellate Authority with a prayer for stay of the eviction order in the meantime and in the event such prayer is made, the Rent Control Appellate Authority shall consider the said prayer for stay, taking into consideration that in the event the execution is allowed and executed, it may likely to cause prejudice and irreparable loss to the petitioner. However, we make it clear that we have not gone into the merits of the matter and it is for the Rent Control Appellate Authority to decide whether any stay shall be granted in the facts and circumstances of the case.

Considering the fact that the execution matter is posted on 31^st July, 2026 and the petitioner seems to have acted diligently in pursuing the application for stay of the eviction proceedings, we stay the execution for a period of fortnight only to enable the petitioner to approach the Rent Control Appellate Authority with the prayer for stay of the eviction proceedings.

With the aforesaid observations, this petition is disposed of.